2006 (11) TMI 630

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... handigarh in ITA No. 507/Chd/2003 proposing following substantial questions of law : Whether, the Tribunal is right in law and facts of the case, in deleting the addition treating the unexplained accretion in the capital account of the partner as his income and not of the firm, when his explanation with regard to source of funds has been held to be unsatisfactorily ? 2. During the course o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... a situation, addition to the income of the firm was not called for. 4. Learned counsel for the revenue relies upon the judgment of Allahabad High Court in Jagmohan Ram Ram Chandra v. CIT [2005] 274 ITR 405 (All.), wherein it was observed that if the firm fails to give explanation regarding source of deposit, the firm was liable to be taxed. 5. In the present case, the firm has given explana .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X